Case Overview
The case involved X Corp. (formerly Twitter) appealing the dismissal of its application to stay proceedings in British Columbia, arguing that the dispute should be heard in California as per the forum selection clause in its Terms of Service. The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Legal Issues and Arguments
The key legal issue was whether the forum selection clause, requiring disputes to be heard in California, applied to Masood Masjoody’s defamation claims. X Corp. argued that the clause encompassed the dispute since it related to the use of services. The court found that the clause did not apply because the claims involved third-party content, not Masjoody’s use of services. Additionally, X Corp. argued that the limitation of liability clause shielded it from responsibility for defamatory content posted by others. The court rejected this, finding that Masjoody’s claims extended beyond third-party content to include direct defamation by X Corp. and allegations of facilitating conspiracies.

Judgment and Costs
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the lower court’s decision. It concluded that X Corp. failed to prove that the claims clearly fell within the scope of the forum selection clause. As a result, the appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to Masood Masjoody. The judgment did not specify a monetary amount for costs, leaving them to be assessed or agreed upon later.